First the Pentarchy, it is a glorious but untenable non-working institution. The idea that it was some gold standard of some “undivided church” is not founded in history, AT ALL. From the time of the Pauline Epistles to this very day, there have been parties in schism, there was NO time in the history of Christianity when all the baptized were united in faith. Most of the notable early heresies and the schismatic communities that adhered to them are in the dust. (There is a reason for that.)
Founded for political reasons the pentarchy was never a practical working reality. It was a creation of man indisputably, having no foundation in scripture or tradition. It is no more mandated than the college of cardinals or national patriarchates.
Recognizned in 451 at the Council of Chalcedon, the sees that were included are:
- Patriarch of Rome
- Patriarch of Constantinople
- Patriarch of Alexandria
- Patriarch of Antioch
- Patriarch of Jerusalem
But here is the deal, WHO decides WHICH claimant to an ancient patriarchal see is a Pentarch? Who determines which party is the legitimate claimant of a patriarchal (pentarchal) see?
Long before the Latins created a “Latin Patriarch of Constantinople” (now abolished) or a “Coptic Catholic Patriarchate of Alexandria” or the “Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem,” the pro-Chalcedonian bishops of the Hellenic colonies in, Antioch, and Alexandria, had taken patriarchal dignities for themselves. No ecumenical council had confirmed this. Today, in the 21st century, the Greek Orthodox Alexandrian Patriarchate is enjoying an all-time high of adherents at around 300,000. The Coptic patriarch counts some 6M+ souls. Both claim to be rightful heirs of the Patriarchal See of Alexandria, the throne of St. Mark. In Jersualem there are at least FOUR patriarchs today claiming the see: Armenian, Greek & Latin! (The deposed Greek patriarch still claims he is the rightful patriarch so there are two claimants today to this Greek see.)
By the time of the Pentarchy’s creation, the Assyrian Church of the East in the Persian Empire and the Oriental Orthodox (Copts & Syrians) were out the door. Who was left in those Oriental sees save the Greek bishops who were then fancied to be the Patriarchs there…
The Pentarchy, like the College of Cardinals, was a creation of the church, not something handed down by Christ Himself.
By the time of 1054, the members of the Pentarchy cited by the EO were in fact the Greek Patriarch in Constantinople, and his the bishops of the Hellenic communities (mostly trading colonies) in Alexandria & and Antioch set up to rival the non-Chalcedonian bodies.
My point? Well to be fair and compare apples to apples, oranges to oranges, is it fair or accurate to paint a picture of a solitary Roman patriarch breaking communion with 4 undivided historic Eastern sees? In my view or history it is more accurate to say that when the Constanipolitan and the Roman patriarchs (once again) suffered the indignity of schism in 1054 (*), it was between those TWO sees and the Hellenic bishops of Jerusalem, Alexandria & Antioch sided rather naturally with the Byzantine elder brother – the patriarch of the imperial city of the Greek empire. Not exactly four neutral and equally powerful parties there.
OK let’s get it straight: